Businesspeople are vulgar chancers

ILoveYourVibes

Tell me how wrote: »

Think the bit in bold is an important word to add.

Its not.

Its the environment.


They wouldn't survive in it if they weren't chancers and ballsy.

You do need people like them. To make jobs keep an economy going.

I just wouldn't want to be friends with one.

ILoveYourVibes

rdhma wrote: »

He dismissed an entire faculty of education because in his view, it was a tool of evil capitalism.

The opposite. He dismisses those who seek to dismiss universities because they are not the tool of capitalism. He dismisses those who seek to close all studies that are outside the realm of business.

ILoveYourVibes

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

Its not.

Its the environment.


They wouldn't survive in it if they weren't chancers and ballsy.

You do need people like them. To make jobs keep an economy going.

I just wouldn't want to be friends with one.

Lets be honest they wouldn't want to be friends with me either so its not like I am being mean.

Why would a man who is a poet appreciate the personality of a business man?

Do you hear business men fawning over poets?


No.

ohnonotgmail

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

What has what the president said got to do with our education system?

Nothing.

He is talking about his experience of business people.

Yeah they might make money and yeah they make jobs. They might not be the type of people you would want to be friends with though.

did you bother to read the article?

The last tie i checked universities were part of our education system.

President Michael D. Higgins has warned that the capacity of universities to provide a “moral space” for discussion is being eroded at a time of growing political populism.
Mr Higgins, who was opening a celebration of Trinity College Dublin’s College Historical Debating Society, said “universities are not there merely to produce students who are useful”.

ILoveYourVibes

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

did you bother to read the article?

The last tie i checked universities were part of our education system.

Yes. I read the article.

Do you read my posts?

He is not criticizing our education system he is criticizing the erosion of it.

ohnonotgmail

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

Yes. I read the article.

Do you read my posts?

He is not criticizing our education system he is criticizing the erosion of it.

he is criticising the priorities of our education system. and rightly so. universities should be about teaching people HOW to think. they are not vocational institutions.

ILoveYourVibes

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

he is criticising the priorities of our education system. and rightly so. universities should be about teaching people HOW to think. they are not vocational institutions.

They can be both. They should be both.

topper75

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Any other candidate would cost the same salary and probably draw the pension for decades longer. Just say that you have a personal dislike for the man and stop trying to dress it up in terms of costs which are associated with the office, not the office holder.

Touché. I brought my issues with the office into the matter. Should not have. Two separate issues.

Cee-Jay-Cee

anewme wrote: »

Gotta love Miggeldy.

Very learned man.

It’s learnt.

Better Than Christ

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

You'll have to admit he has become a bit aware of his own importance though? I mentioned it earlier, but his increasing use of the rolling R, and his need to continuously reference the canon of piss-poor Irish authors and poets marks him out as a man who feels the need to constantly show how Presidential he is to the Plain People of Ireland.

That's just how he speaks, and has always done, for as long as I can remember anyway. Here's a clip from when he became Minister for Arts, Culture and the Gaeltacht, twenty-seven years ago.

Arghus

Cee-Jay-Cee wrote: »

It’s learnt.

It's both.

skooterblue2

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

universities should be about teaching people HOW to think. they are not vocational institutions.

Like how so? Can I not make up my own mind? Can I not investigate myself? I cannot decide which opinion I would like to follow? What about the practical end of getting out and getting a job?

up for anything

Hoop66 wrote: »

All this "read the actual article" nonsense is playing havoc with my pitchfork supply business.

The first time in the last half a decade on AH that I've laughed out loud for real.

ohnonotgmail

skooterblue2 wrote: »

Like how so? Can I not make up my own mind? Can I not investigate myself? I cannot decide which opinion I would like to follow? What about the practical end of getting out and getting a job?

I even capitalised the word HOW to make it easier for you to understand. HOW not WHAT.

Hotblack Desiato

tjhook wrote: »

I assume the queen has opinions on the political goings-on in her own and other countries, but I don't really know what they are. It makes it easier for her to represent all the citizens of her country.

Really, even republicans? and they do exist

The massive difference of course is that as a monarch she inherited her office, has no qualifications except who her daddy was, was not elected to it, and her term of office is for life. So she better bloody well keep her mouth shut about anything even remotely controversial because there is no method by which the people can replace her if they're not happy about it, and no set term of office they can look forward to ending either.

Whereas our president comes out with statements that are controversial, to say the least. I think he could take a leaf out of her book. Just *one* leaf, for those with a rabid hate of all things "across the water"

You're probably not old enough to remember, but before Mary Robinson presidents got criticised for basically sitting on their hole in the Park and rubber stamping government policy. She was elected because she said she would speak out about issues which were being ignored in our society. We're not going back to the old "elected monarch, shut up and count the money rolling in" model, thank you very much.

AllForIt

President Michael D. Higgins has warned that the capacity of universities to provide a “moral space” for discussion is being eroded at a time of growing political populism.

The only ppl who are eroding the capacity of universities to provide a space! for discussion are lefties who encourage restriction of speech and forced speech. There is no such thing a 'moral' spaces.

Mr Higgins, who was opening a celebration of Trinity College Dublin’s College Historical Debating Society, said “universities are not there merely to produce students who are useful”.

This is a very very odd statement. Universities provide a service - they are not there to 'produce' anything other than to produce their own educational services competently. I go to university to get a higher level education for myself. I don't attend there to be a 'product' of the state that was 'produced'.

Of course if I do end up being a productive tax paying self sufficient member of society that's great but I'm not doing it for the *sake* of society - that's just absurd. I'm doing it for myself ultimately, not 'society'.

This notion of the state 'producing' ppl as if the state 'designs' society I frankly think is creepy. That sounds of communist thinking to me.

“They are there to produce citizens who are respectful of the rights of others to participate and also to be able to participate fully, drawing on a wide range of scholarship,” he said on Monday night.

Another odd statement. There 'to be respectful of the rights of others'. This sounds to me like some kind of whacky social engineering. To 'design' ppl of a certain character.

The President said there is a growing cohort of people who are alienated and “who feel they have lost their attachment to society and decision making”.

Like anyone to the right of politics eh!

He explicitly targeted US president Donald Trump’s political sloganeering, saying these alienated voters “can become available for others who come and say to them ‘I want to be your voice’.”
“This is the background to ‘Make America Great Again’, that nonsense - that’s all it is. [It is] just a wild shout. But it is exploitative of an alienated group.”

I find this a deeply hypocritical statement. He's NOT talking about the voices of everyone just the voices of a segment of the populace. The idea that only the voices of minorities matter is just nonsense and speaks to his own personally held political and social opinions.

Mr Higgins said universities are relied upon “to create that moral space where people will be able to evaluate different suggestions”.

In this era of hate speech legislation, the vilification of anyone on the right, it is quite ironic he talks about 'evaluating different suggestions'.

“We have a fractured society and the university is the place to where you would go for putting things back together in relation to discursive options,” he told a crowd assembled in Trinity’s Examinations Hall.

We don't have a fractured society unless of course you think everyone should agree with your own opinions. He says he want's debate, but imo as long as the final conclusions are one's he thinks are correct.

He said universities and academics had become overly focused on the market, because of a sense that there was “magic happening in the marketplace… when in fact actually what you had was a whole series of vulgar chancers”.

Again, I find this an appalling statement from the President of our country. No profit = no money for social services. It's quite appalling he would talk about entrepreneurs, go-getters and risk takers in the fashion he has when they have gone to the trouble to learn the complexities of business though years of study and then castigates them for their interest and drive in the area. Quite appalling.

Recalling his debating days in university, the President said debating is “a life-changing experience, most people who have done it will remember the very first time they debated and the sensation it caused”.

I wouldn't mind debating him on his comments and I'm sure I'd enjoy the 'sensation' it would cause. I don't think the interviewer challenged a single one of his points, it was just a speech in interview form.

Tell me how

^^^
Something tells me you started reading this article with your mind already made up.

Think you might not exactly enjoy your debate with him as much as you think when he asks you to defend the first point you make without using rhetoric.

tjhook

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

You're probably not old enough to remember, but before Mary Robinson presidents got criticised for basically sitting on their hole in the Park and rubber stamping government policy. She was elected because she said she would speak out about issues which were being ignored in our society. We're not going back to the old "elected monarch, shut up and count the money rolling in" model, thank you very much.

Yeah, I'm old enough to remember. The election of Mary Robinson was good in a number of ways, breaking moulds and all that.

Having said that, I think we should look at the purpose of the role of president. I don't think the role was put in place to pursue controversial policies or to push one side of a debate. For me, the most important reason to have a president at all is to provide a balance to the Oireachtas. Not just to be another voice supporting the views of one half of society. We can elect TDs to do that. The president should be above politics, and represent the nation (i.e. all of us).

As an extreme example, the president being head of the armed forces means that no government can unilaterally mobilise the army for its own goals. Or a real example - Paddy Hillery wouldn't have been known for social activism, or for adopting public political positions. But when our democracy was under threat, he stepped up. There won't be many people raving about how great he was, but despite coming from a political party he won't have excluded people. He did the state some service.

Anybody can look for whatever they want in a president, but I'd prefer one who doesn't push a political and sociological agenda.

Hotblack Desiato

Sure but we all knew what we were getting second time around with Michael D and he won a majority on the first count. I'm sure Leo might find his pronouncements annoying from time to time, but is that a bad thing? In the end they don't amount to anything really, he has no powers in relation to government policy.

I find your assertion about the army to be very dubious as well, the constitution says that the Dail has the power to declare war.

tjhook

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

I find your assertion about the army to be very dubious as well, the constitution says that the Dail has the power to declare war.

Yes, the Dail (and not the president) declares war. However, "The supreme command of the Defence Forces is hereby vested in the President."


So if the government and president clash over the constitutionality of mobilising the armed forces, the troops obey the president rather than the government. It's a very useful arrangement that should prevent the army from being used unconstitutionally against the populace.

Ush1

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

what was overtly political about it? he was commenting on the priorities of our education system. he wasn't getting involved in party politics.

That is a political statement, it's divisive.

ohnonotgmail

Ush1 wrote: »

That is a political statement, it's divisive.

only divisive for the uneducated.

Hotblack Desiato

tjhook wrote: »

Yes, the Dail (and not the president) declares war. However, "The supreme command of the Defence Forces is hereby vested in the President."


So if the government and president clash over the constitutionality of mobilising the armed forces, the troops obey the president rather than the government. It's a very useful arrangement that should prevent the army from being used unconstitutionally against the populace.

That's the president's role in general, to uphold the constitution, you made it sound as if he or she could act on a whim. But the constitution is clear, if the Dail declare war then the president cannot intervene because the constitution explicitly gives the Dail that power. The situation you mention cannot arise.

Also the Dail can remove the President, the President can't remove the government, so it's clear who is really in charge if it comes down to it.

skooterblue2

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

I even capitalised the word HOW to make it easier for you to understand. HOW not WHAT.

Its the same thing, if you deviate from the chorus line by offering a different thought, you will be ostracised. Imagine having a different opinion that America was thriving under Trump or there are other options than abortion for kids we would rather not have.

Ush1

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

only divisive for the uneducated.

Was Peter Casey only divisive for the uneducated?

ohnonotgmail

skooterblue2 wrote: »

Its the same thing, if you deviate from the chorus line by offering a different thought, you will be ostracised. Imagine a different opinion that America was thriving under Trump or there are other options than abortion for kids we would rather not have.

listen, you have completely ignored what i said so no point responding to you.

tjhook

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Also the Dail can remove the President, the President can't remove the government, so it's clear who is really in charge if it comes down to it.

Good point. That raises all kinds of possibilities.

skooterblue2

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

listen, you have completely ignored what i said so no point responding to you.

"I dont like what you said so I am taking my toys and going home".

Yes this is what they are sadly teaching at university these days.

ohnonotgmail

skooterblue2 wrote: »

"I dont like what you said so I am taking my toys and going home".

Yes this is what they are sadly teaching at university these days.

I ignored what you said because it is not relevant to what i posted. a subtle difference but then subtlety isn't your strongpoint.

kowloon

stoneill wrote: »

Do you really need to go to university to learn morals or ethics?

I do very little of the rape and slaughter these days and I've done no genocide at all. Is that the result of me learning some CAD? I'd have to say almost definitely.

mikhail

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

... his need to continuously reference the canon of piss-poor Irish authors and poets ...

As a nation, we have 4 Nobel Prizes in literature. Per capita, that might make us the best nation of authors and poets on earth. I suspect you just don't like poetry, which is okay.

Arghus wrote: »

It's both.

No, in that context it's learned, pronounced as two syllables.

"He learned/learnt the spelling of the word."

"A learned man knows how to spell many words".

Note the pronunciation guide for meanings 1-3 vs the meaning for 4: https://www.dictionary.com/browse/learned?s=t

ohnonotgmail

mikhail wrote: »

As a nation, we have 4 Nobel Prizes in literature. Per capita, that might make us the best nation of authors and poets on earth. I suspect you just don't like poetry, which is okay.


No, in that context it's learned, pronounced as two syllables.

"He learned/learnt the spelling of the word."

"A learned man knows how to spell many words".

Note the pronunciation guide for meanings 1-3 vs the meaning for 4: https://www.dictionary.com/browse/learned?s=t

per capita that does make us the best nation of authors and poets by a long way.

skooterblue2

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

I ignored what you said because it is not relevant to what i posted. a subtle difference but then subtlety isn't your strongpoint.

Thought you were heading home to play in the sand box?

ohnonotgmail

skooterblue2 wrote: »

Thought you were heading home to play in the sand box?

why don'y you try and post something intelligent. It would make a pleasant change.

Ray Palmer

AllForIt wrote: »

In this era of hate speech legislation, the vilification of anyone on the right, it is quite ironic he talks about 'evaluating different suggestions'.

What era is that given hate speech legislation is from 1989? Pretty sure that was actually a replacement of other hate speech laws there before too.

skooterblue2

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

why don'y you try and post something intelligent. It would make a pleasant change.

I am just representing the great unwashed.

Hotblack Desiato

Ray Palmer wrote: »

What era is that given hate speech legislation is from 1989? Pretty sure that was actually a replacement of other hate speech laws there before too.

I believe that poster is referring to the massive FUD generated about proposals for updated hate speech laws, which got nowhere before the election so are now moot.

Scoundrel

tdf7187 wrote: »

Says 'our' president.

How did this absurd dwarf manage to become elected president of my country? He's an embarassment. He also manages to insult 48% of the population of our main ally. What a fecking eejit.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/universities-do-not-exist-to-produce-students-who-are-useful-president-says-1.4190859

Absolutely right so-called businessmen are nothing but charlatans and tax dodgers driving around in disgusting jeeps or "crew cabs" with one arm out the window. The only growth they create is on their arses or stomachs a truly nauseating creature who think they're Bill Gates and Steve Jobs rolled into one because they have a Londis franchise in Ballygobackwards also usually vote FG or become a councillor for the bribes.

rdhma

Scoundrel wrote: »

Absolutely right so-called businessmen are nothing but charlatans and tax dodgers driving around in disgusting jeeps or "crew cabs" with their arms out the window. The only growth they create is on their arses or stomachs a truly nauseating creature who think they're Bill Gates and Steve Jobs rolled into one because they have a Londis franchise in Ballygobackwards usually vote FG.

Replace 'businessmen' with a reference to a particular race/ religion/ nationality and you wouldn't be long in getting a ban for language like that.

A false generalisation worthy of Donald trump.

Ray Palmer

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

I believe that poster is referring to the massive FUD generated about proposals for updated hate speech laws, which got nowhere before the election so are now moot.

He may very well be but it still makes for a riddiculious statement. It isn't an era but something in Europe since WWII that has always been updated.

Hotblack Desiato

Mods really should change the thread title as it completely misrepresents what MDH actually said.

SEPT 23 1989

Scoundrel wrote: »

Absolutely right so-called businessmen are nothing but charlatans and tax dodgers driving around in disgusting jeeps or "crew cabs" with one arm out the window. The only growth they create is on their arses or stomachs a truly nauseating creature who think they're Bill Gates and Steve Jobs rolled into one because they have a Londis franchise in Ballygobackwards also usually vote FG or become a councillor for the bribes.

The men you run down break their balls generating hundreds of millions for the state every year

VAT
Income Tax
Commercial Rates
Water Rates
Multiple employer charges
And the rest of the non state charges fleecing small business

growleaves

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

The men you run down break their balls generating hundreds of millions for the state every year

VAT
Income Tax
Commercial Rates
Water Rates
Multiple employer charges
And the rest of the non state charges fleecing small business

I agree these people make a huge contribution to Irish society (especially economic, though not saying exclusively economic). We'd all be much poorer without this kind of commercial energy.

But it isn't possible to regard business practices neutrally. If someone contributes €200m to the exchequer and they are dishonest do we say "Well we need the money"? No.

Commerical integrity is not so solid in our society, and yet its part of the basis for wealth. If you couldn't trust anyone on money matters the result would be universal poverty.

There are people in this country who admire themselves for their business prowess above everything else. So if they cheat someone out of money, they admire themselves for being clever. Maybe the posters on here don't know anyone like that, but I do.

biko

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Mods really should change the thread title as it completely misrepresents what MDH actually said.

Don't expected forum mods to read your thread post
You need to report the first post in the thread

growleaves

West of Ireland is best of Ireland

But East of Ireland is not the least of Ireland.

Raconteuse

Yurt! wrote: »

We hate working class people when they don't work, we hate them when they do, we hate them when the become President and use big words we have to look up.

"We" do? All I see is hatred of people who don't work at all, and some who have reservations about MDH endorsing socialist values while living a lavish lifestyle.

rdhma

growleaves wrote: »

I agree these people make a huge contribution to Irish society (especially economic, though not saying exclusively economic). We'd all be much poorer without this kind of commercial energy.

But it isn't possible to regard business practices neutrally. If someone contributes €200m to the exchequer and they are dishonest do we say "Well we need the money"? No.

Commerical integrity is not so solid in our society, and yet its part of the basis for wealth. If you couldn't trust anyone on money matters the result would be universal poverty.

There are people in this country who admire themselves for their business prowess above everything else. So if they cheat someone out of money, they admire themselves for being clever. Maybe the posters on here don't know anyone like that, but I do.

€200m at 12.5% means revenue of €1.6bn.
There are only 64 corporate entities in Ireland with that much annual revenue.

90% of businesses in Ireland employ less than 10 people, according to a recent UCC study.
https://www.businessworld.ie/news-from-ireland/Majority-of-Irish-small-businesses-keen-to-remain-at-current-scale-572199.html
in total employing over 400,000 people in this country.

The average small business owner makes €42000 per annum.
https://www.payscale.com/research/IE/Job=Small_Business_Owner_%2F_Operator/Salary

compared with the average industrial wage of €41000
https://www.cso.ie/en/statistics/earnings/earningsandlabourcosts/

Many business owners work long hours for modest reward, while providing employment to people in their area.
Maybe the posters on here don't know anyone like that, but I do.

FixdePitchmark

rdhma wrote: »

€200m at 12.5% means revenue of €1.6bn.
There are only 64 corporate entities in Ireland with that much annual revenue.

90% of businesses in Ireland employ less than 10 people, according to a recent UCC study.
https://www.businessworld.ie/news-from-ireland/Majority-of-Irish-small-businesses-keen-to-remain-at-current-scale-572199.html
in total employing over 400,000 people in this country.

The average small business owner makes €42000 per annum.
https://www.payscale.com/research/IE/Job=Small_Business_Owner_%2F_Operator/Salary

compared with the average industrial wage of €41000
https://www.cso.ie/en/statistics/earnings/earningsandlabourcosts/

Many business owners work long hours for modest reward, while providing employment to people in their area.
Maybe the posters on here don't know anyone like that, but I do.

42 K is their declared income.

Do they declare everything. Cough Cough.

Also their lifestyle is greatly supported by tax breaks and "expenses".

growleaves

rdhma wrote: »

€200m at 12.5% means revenue of €1.6bn.
There are only 64 corporate entities in Ireland with that much annual revenue.

I picked a number out of the air - should have picked a smaller number.

I acknowleged that we depend on businesspeople for more or less our whole way of life. I know honest and hardworking business owners too! We all do(?)

Scoundrel

rdhma wrote: »

€200m at 12.5% means revenue of €1.6bn.
There are only 64 corporate entities in Ireland with that much annual revenue.

90% of businesses in Ireland employ less than 10 people, according to a recent UCC study.
https://www.businessworld.ie/news-from-ireland/Majority-of-Irish-small-businesses-keen-to-remain-at-current-scale-572199.html
in total employing over 400,000 people in this country.

The average small business owner makes €42000 per annum.
https://www.payscale.com/research/IE/Job=Small_Business_Owner_%2F_Operator/Salary

compared with the average industrial wage of €41000
https://www.cso.ie/en/statistics/earnings/earningsandlabourcosts/

Many business owners work long hours for modest reward, while providing employment to people in their area.
Maybe the posters on here don't know anyone like that, but I do.

Ah the poor auld honest businessman only gets 42k honest to God sir Jesus if you really believe that I've some magic hand sanitizer to sell you. The so called businessman is one of the worst spongers and tax cheats this country has ever produced many are also landlords creaming it in at the expense of others with massively overpriced rents. Sure aren't they only providing the employment out of the goodness of their hearts?